During a forum at a high school, a Rhode Island candidate for attorney general compared the term to an extreme racial epithet and called it "a curse to my people."

A candidate for attorney general in Rhode Island flew off the handle yesterday after his opponent refused to stop using the word marijuana. Alan Gordon's outburst, which took place at a local high school, culminated in him comparing the use of the term to a racial epithet after which he stormed off the stage.

"That's like saying N-I-G-G-E-R," Gordon told Democratic candidate Peter Neronha, making emphatic hand gestures as he spelled out the insulting term. Shockingly, the crowd of high school students erupted into wild cheers in response.

Gordon also blasted the word marijuana as "a curse to my people."

"You will not say it in this school again, today or in lessons. Knock it off!" he said. Then, Gordon walked off the stage. According to TMZ, he did not return.

A bit of background: Gordon, a member of the Compassion Party, has no problem with weed itself. In fact, he was arrested earlier this month after police found 48 pounds of marijuana in the home he shares with Anne Armstrong, who's running for governor on the Compassion Party ticket. The candidates have said they think their arrests were politically motivated.

What Gordon does not like is the term marijuana. And last night at North Kingstown High School, where the attorney general candidates took questions from students, he made sure everyone knew.

Armstrong told TMZ Gordon was promised beforehand that Neronha would not use the term. Neronha apparently did anyway—twice.

Gordon's issue with the term stems from his belief that it's rooted in racism. It's not a completely outlandish idea. In fact, one of the leaders of the movement to make weed illegal has been accused of using blatant racism to argue for prohibition. "There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers and any others," Harry J. Anslinger, who led the Federal Bureau of Narcotics from 1930 to 1962, reportedly once said.

Reason's Jacob Sullum has noted that the origin of the term marijuana is unclear. But a 1925 headline from The New York Times—"Mexican, Crazed by Marihuana, Runs Amuck With Butcher Knife"—is probably one of the reasons some people feel like the word has a racist connotation.

Neronha, for his part, doesn't plan to stop saying marijuana any time soon. In an interview this morning with Dan Paquet, a local radio host for WPRO, Neronha said he's "comfortable using the word" because it's what everyone uses.

Neronha called Gordon's behavior "unconventional" and "not something that I would ever engage in." Still, he emphasized that he has no problem with Gordon himself, and would not be opposed to facing him again in a similar setting.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

"The people who were opposed to marijuana back in the Progressive era used racist memes to garner support for prohibition" is a reason to suspect that the word itself is racist? So now we can't use the word "American" because David Duke used to use it all the time? What are you on about.

There are lots of names for the plant and it's products. I don't know that it was ever commonly called Canabis in reference to getting high. It certainly was commonly called hemp - as the fiber. But I don't know that too many folks used that term either.

Anyway, we know that it is derived from the spanish, and we know that it wasn't commonly used in print until the 50's.

But so what? Do you think Cheech Marin is being racist when he jokes about marijuana? It doesn't matter what the word meant 70 years ago anyway. It is what it means today that is important. And today it is a synonym for pot, ganja, dope, reefer, bud.... They all mean the same thing today.

This is way dumber than the fight you guys keep telling us we shouldn't have... the one over people using "begs the question" to mean "raises the question". And at least that on actually is an attempt to preserve the meaning of words, not destroy them to score cheap argument points.

It doesn't matter what the word meant 70 years ago anyway. It is what it means today that is important.

^ This. One of the most annoying things about the campus anti-prejudice crusade is this tendency to dig up these long-gone meanings for words and then declare that the words themselves carry some sort of pollution with them forever after infecting anyone who speaks them regardless of that person's intentions or understanding of what the word means.

It's going to be trouble when they figure out the origins of words like "Slavic" and "Hebrew."

""One of the most annoying things about the campus anti-prejudice crusade is this tendency to dig up these long-gone meanings for words and then declare that the words themselves carry some sort of pollution with them forever after infecting anyone who speaks them regardless of that person's intentions or understanding of what the word means."

Its sort of like a 'one-drop' theory of 'racism-taint'; where any vague historical-association can be used to pretend that innocuous terminology retain cultural-vestiges from the past. ffs, "1925 headline?" OMG,THEY USED TO SAY "COLORED", TOO - CRAYOLA MUST NOW BE PURGED LEST WE BE INFECTED BY THE SIN-WORD

Isn't that the name of the plant? One could quibble about the spelling, but "weed" and "pot" are slang euphemisms and not accurate. Marijuana is the name of the plant. Cannabis is sometimes used, but cannabis also refers to hemp. Marijuana is the proper word to use when referring to the variety of cannabis used for medicinal and recreational purposes.

Sure, the name probably comes from Spanish with origins in Mexico, but that does not make it racist any more than the city names of "Los Angeles" or "San Antonio" are racist.

Looking on line, one cigarette has about 1 gram of tobacco with 20 cigarettes to a pack and 453 grams/ pound, 48 pounds of tobacco is almost 1100 packs and a pack a day habit over the course of almost 3 years.

One cigarette = about 1 gram of tobacco. At about 28 grams to an ounce, a heavy smoker might smoke a pound about every two weeks or so, smoking about a pack and a half a day. At that rate, it would take about two years to get through 48 pounds.

I couldn't imagine smoking an ounce of MJ in a day. It would require a level of effort and enthusiasm that you just wouldn't have after the first sixteenth of an ounce or so.

"Gordon's issue with the term stems from his belief that it's rooted in racism. It's not a completely outlandish idea. In fact, one of the leaders of the movement to make weed illegal has been accused of using blatant racism to argue for prohibition."

This statement does nothing to dispel the notion that the argument is nonsensical and outlandish.

"Mexican, Crazed by Marihuana, Runs Amuck With Butcher Knife"—is probably one of the reasons some people feel like the word has a racist connotation."

It's also just such a weird choice of cause when you have Anslinger's "crazed Mexicans and Negros on the marijuana raping the white women" angle that is actually why some people think the deliberate use of the Mexican-Spanish word is racist (which it isn't). This here is like saying "White Man Beats Wife in Whisky Fueled Rage" makes the word "Whisky" anti-white racism. It's just, as you say, a complete non-sequitur.

The word was popularized in the U.S. by racists. But it has become the standard term for parts of the cannabis plant that are smoked to get high. To object to it now based on the racist views or intentions of those who first popularized the word makes no sense, and is decades too late.

If you recognize that "the entire country, if not the world, was 'racist' by modern standards" up until the middle-20th century, this is also a meaningless statement.

You might as well say, "any old-enough thing was popularized by racists". Which is to say, 'a thing is old', and nothing morel. Throwing the 'racism' in is just feelgood psychobabble.

"The roman empire had lots of slaves. Romans invented and widely popularized sewers, urban public sanitation. Toilets were segregated for many years. They remain gender-segregated. Toilets are still 99.9% white. Toilets are inseparable from their racist roots"

"The roman empire had lots of slaves. Romans invented and widely popularized sewers, urban public sanitation. Toilets were segregated for many years. They remain gender-segregated. Toilets are still 99.9% white. Toilets are inseparable from their racist roots"

I think you have your senior thesis topic for your History BA from Oberlin.

Remember "Man of the Century"? This was a delightful movie about the 1920s (when beer was a felony and weed legal). The "Juanita" song in the movie rested on the not-unreasonable assumption that somewhere in every Mexican girl's name there lurked a Maria, so it could be safely omitted without loss of the desired double-entendre. After all, the movie star Ayn Rand's generation swooned over, and who was later resurrected to play a role in Atlas Shrugged, was Rodolfo Alfonso Raffaello Pierre Filibert Guglielmi di Valentina d'Antonguolla, and his part in the book was played by Francisco Domingo Carlos Andres Sebastian d'Anconia.

Racism as a term was in continual use from 1936 (from French racisme, 1935), originally in the racist racist, the race racist racism, racist racists race racist race racism racist racist. Racists racist racists race racist.

"But, but all the cool kids at the NYT, WaPo and Buzzfeed News are all Resistance and intersectionality and everything. Do you want EVERYBODY to HATE us? None of the others will want to be with us anymore if we're all common sense and reason, and Robby will get his lunch money stolen by Martin Baron."

"Neronha called Gordon's behavior "unconventional" and "not something that I would ever engage in." Still, he emphasized that he has no problem with Gordon himself, and would not be opposed to facing him again in a similar setting."

The real question is whether the Puerto Rican pronunciation of Mary Jane is collectivist. Iffen it ain't collectivist, then it cain't be racial collectivist. So is it? And if a language is our common heritage, you could argue that ALL words are collectivist in that they form a commons we (and a number of furriners) freely use. Rotsa ruck with that one.